Nursing Staff Factors Contributing to Seclusion in Acute Mental Health Care - An Explorative Cohort Study

Variation in opinions on coercion use among mental healthcare professionals: a questionnaire study

INTRODUCTION

Even if coercive measures are widely applied in psychiatry and have numerous well-known drawbacks, there is limited known on the agreement among mental healthcare professionals' opinions on their use. In a questionnaire study using standardized scenarios, we investigated variation in staff opinions on coercion.

METHODS

In a web-based survey distributed to staff at three psychiatry hospitals, respondents were asked to consider if and what coercion to use by introducing two hypothetical scenarios involving involuntary psychiatric admission and in-hospital coercion.

RESULTS

One hundred thirty-two out of 601 invited staff members responded to the survey (Response Rate = 22%). There was large variation in participating staff members' opinions on how to best manage critical situations and what coercive measures were warranted. In the first scenario, 57% of respondents (n = 76) believed that the patient should be involuntarily admitted to hospital while the remaining respondents believed that the situation should be managed otherwise. Regarding the second scenario, 62% of respondents responded that some in-hospital coercion should be used. The majority of respondents believed that colleagues would behave similarly (60%) or with a tendency towards more coercion use (34%). Male gender, being nursing staff and having less coercion experience predicted being less inclined to choose involuntary hospital admission.

CONCLUSION

There is a high degree of variation in coercion use. This study suggests that this variation persists despite staff members being confronted with the same standardized situations. There is a need for evidence-based further guidance to minimize coercion in critical mental healthcare situations.

Analysis of England's incident and mental health nursing workforce data 2015-2022

WHAT IS KNOWN ON THE SUBJECT?: Mental health services report adverse incidents in different ways and the relationship between adverse incidents and the workforce is uncertain. In England, there are national datasets recording all incidents and workforce statistics though there is no peer-reviewed evidence examining recent trends. WHAT THIS PAPER ADDS TO EXISTING KNOWLEDGE?: Although there has been an overall increase in the number of mental health nurses, more are working in the community and the number of nurses relative to adverse incidents has decreased. There have been service-provision changes but the role of mental health nurses has not significantly changed in this period, and we can therefore assume that their current practice is saturated with risk or increased reporting. To help understand the relationship between nurses and incidents, we need to transform how incidents are recorded in England. WHAT ARE THE IMPLICATIONS FOR PRACTICE?: English mental health services report greater levels of patient-related factors such as self-harm or aggression rather than missed or erroneous care. This makes it difficult to understand if a rise in incident frequency is linked to reporting behaviour, patient risk, unsafe/ineffective care or other reasons and therefore planning workforce deployment to improve care quality is problematic.

ABSTRACT

INTRODUCTION: There is a paucity of empirical data examining incidents and mental health nurses and the relationship between the two remains uncertain.

AIM

Comparison of English national data for incidents and nursing workforce to examine recent trends.

METHOD

Descriptive analysis of two national datasets of incidents and workforce data for England between 2015 and 2022.

RESULTS

A 46% increase in incidents was found; the leading causes are self-harm and aggressive behaviour. Despite the rise in adverse incident reporting, a 6% increase in mental health nurses was found, with more nurses in community settings than hospitals.

DISCUSSION

Current services are incident reporting at greater concentrations than in previous years. Patient-related behaviour continues to be most prominently reported, rather than possible antecedent health services issues that may contribute to reporting. Whilst staffing has increased, this does not seem to have kept pace with the implied workload evident in the increase in incident reports.

IMPLICATIONS FOR PRACTICE

Greater emphasis should be placed on health service behaviour in reporting mechanisms. Self-harm and aggression should continue to be considered adverse outcomes, but causal health service factors, such as missed care, should be present in pooled reporting to help reduce the occurrence of adverse outcomes.

Developing nurse-sensitive outcomes in acute inpatient mental health settings-A systematic review

BACKGROUND

While nurse-sensitive outcomes (NSOs) are well established in numerous health settings, to date there is no indicator suite of NSOs for inpatient mental health settings.

AIM

To assess the relationship between nursing variables and patient outcomes in acute inpatient mental health settings to determine which outcomes can be used as indicators of the quality of nursing care.

METHODS

Databases accessed were CINAHL, MEDLINE, PsycINFO and EMBASE, last searched in May 2022. The review followed the 2020 PRISMA checklist for systematic reviews. Papers published between 1995 and 2022, conducted in acute mental health care units were included. The quality of the studies was assessed using the Effective Public Health Practice Project Quality Assessment Tool. A meta-analysis was not possible because of the large number of variables and measurement inconsistencies.

RESULTS

A total of 57 studies were reviewed. Studies were categorised according to whether they found a significant or non-significant relationship between nurse variables and patient outcomes. Seven outcomes-aggression, seclusion, restraint, absconding, pro-re-nata medications, special observations and self-harm-were identified. For each outcome, there were significant findings for several nurse variables indicating that all included outcomes could be used as NSOs. However, evidence for aggression, seclusion and restraint use as suitable NSOs was more robust than the evidence for self-harm, absconding, pro-re-nata medications and special observations.

CONCLUSION

All the seven outcomes can all be used to develop an NSO indicator suite in mental health inpatient settings. More work is needed to establish high-quality studies to clearly demonstrate the relationship between these outcome measures and changes in nurse variables such as nurse staffing, skill mix, work environment, nurse education and nurse experience.

PATIENT AND PUBLIC CONTRIBUTION

Patient or public contribution was not possible because of the type of the variables being explored.

Nursing staff composition and its influence on seclusion in an adult forensic mental health inpatient setting: The truth about numbers

INTRODUCTION

Research on the influence of nursing staff composition and use of seclusion in the forensic mental health inpatient settings is sparse. Nursing staff composition refers to staffing levels, roles, gender ratio and skill mix of the ward teams. Internationally, the rates of seclusion in some forensic mental health inpatient settings have increased over the past 10 years despite global efforts to reduce and eliminate its use.

AIM

To examine whether the use of seclusion in a forensic mental health inpatient setting can be attributed to staffing composition or to contextual factors such as day of the week, month or other clinical factors.

METHOD

Retrospective data collection was conducted using seclusion data, daily ward reports and staff rosters. Data were collected for all shifts in the hospital over a six-month period.

RESULTS

Three staffing variables were identified as having an influence on the use of seclusion: the number of registered nurses on duty, the presence of the shift coordinator and having a lead nurse on shift.

DISCUSSION

Senior nurse oversight and guidance are important factors in assisting staff to identify clinical deterioration and intervene early which may assist services reduce the use of seclusion.

IMPLICATIONS FOR PRACTICE

As staffing levels and composition are modifiable, the results of this study may assist nurse leaders to consider workforce improvements to reduce seclusion use.

Influence of mental health professionals' attitudes and personality traits on decision-making around coercion: Results from an experimental quantitative survey using case vignettes

OBJECTIVE

Research on coercion in mental healthcare has recently shifted to the investigation of subjective aspects, both on the side of the people with mental disorders affected and the staff members involved. In this context, the role of personality traits and attitudes of staff members in decision-making around coercion is increasingly being assessed. This study aimed to examine the role of staff attitudes towards coercion and staff members' personality traits in decision-making around coercion in an experimental setting.

METHODS

We assessed the attitudes towards coercion and (general) personality traits of mental health professionals in psychiatric hospitals with a quantitative survey. Furthermore, we developed case vignettes representing cases in a 'grey zone' and included them in the survey to assess staff members' decisions about coercion in specific situations.

RESULTS

A general approving attitude towards coercion significantly influenced decisions around coercion in individual cases-resulting in a more likely approval of applying coercion in the cases described in the vignettes. Personality traits did not seem to be relevant in this regard.

CONCLUSION

Strategies to reduce coercion in mental healthcare institutions should focus more on the role of staff attitudes and encourage staff members to reflect on them critically.

Risk factors associated with use of coercive practices in adult mental health inpatients: A systematic review

WHAT IS KNOWN ON THE SUBJECT?: Coercive practices such as restraint (physically holding a person) or seclusion (containing a person in locked room) are frequently used in mental health care. How often and which specific practices are used is not consistent across different healthcare systems, hospitals or wards. Internationally, there is agreement on the need to monitor and reduce the use of coercive practices. WHAT THIS PAPER ADDS TO EXISTING KNOWLEDGE?: The reviewed evidence suggests a number of different factors affect a person's risk of experiencing coercive practices, while admitted to a mental health ward. However, there is currently not enough high-quality research evidence to say which factors are most important or how they work to influence the likelihood of a person experiencing coercive practice. WHAT ARE THE IMPLICATIONS FOR PRACTICE?: When carrying out risk assessments, mental health professionals must take into account that a number of different factors are important and explore these with the patient. Care plans aimed at minimizing the use of coercive practices, such as restraint, must be personalized and developed with the individual. ABSTRACT: Introduction Coercive practices, such as physical restraint and seclusion, are a common feature of all mental healthcare systems. However, there is considerable variation in their use, concern about their iatrogenic potential and agreement internationally on the need to monitor and reduce their use. Aims To examine the evidence concerning risk factors associated with use of coercive practices in adults admitted to inpatient psychiatric services. Method A systematic review, consistent with PRIMSA guidelines, of four databases (PsychINFO, Medline, CINHAL and Embase). Peer-reviewed, English language articles from database inception to February 2020 were included. Methodological quality was assessed using the Quality Assessment Tool for Quantitative Studies. Results Twenty studies met inclusion criteria. Risk factors examined in the studies organized around four categories: patient socio-demographic; patient clinical; staff; and organizational factors. Overall, methodological quality of papers was deemed weak, and there was insufficient evidence to support any singular risk factor. Discussion The reviewed evidence suggests risk of coercive practice in inpatient mental health settings is multifactorial. Further research to standardize concept definitions and elucidate the mechanisms behind variance in use is required. Implications for Practice Assessment of patients at risk of coercive practice must take a multifactorial approach.

Influence of nursing staff characteristics on seclusion in acute mental health care-A prospective two-year follow-up study

INTRODUCTION

Seclusion still occurs on mental health wards, despite absence of therapeutic efficacy and high risks of adverse patient effects. Literature on the effect of nursing teams, and the role of psychological characteristics in particular, on frequency of seclusion is scarce.

AIM

To explore the influence of demographic, professional or psychological, nursing team-level, and shift characteristics on the frequency of use of seclusion.

METHODS

Prospective two-year follow-up study.

RESULTS

We found that the probability of seclusion was lower when nursing teams with at least 75% males were on duty, compared to female only teams, odds ratio (OR = 0.283; 95% CrI 0.046-0.811). We observed a trend indicating that teams scoring higher on the openness personality dimension secluded less, (OR = 0.636; 95% CrI 0.292-1.156).

DISCUSSION

Higher proportions of male nurses in teams on duty were associated with lower likelihood of seclusion. We found an indication that teams with a higher mean openness personality trait tended to seclude less. These findings, if causal, could serve as an incentive to reflect on staff mix if circumstances demand better prevention of seclusion.

A Bayesian network model to identify the associations between the use of seclusion in psychiatric care and nursing managers' attitudes towards containment methods

WHAT IS KNOWN ON THE SUBJECT

Seclusion is used frequently in psychiatric care, despite its potential adverse effects. Several programmes aiming to reduce the use of seclusion identify leadership and management as key strategies-however, studies concerning leaders and managers are missing.

WHAT THE PAPER ADDS TO EXISTING KNOWLEDGE

Nursing managers' negative attitudes towards seclusion are associated with less use of the measure, and nursing managers' higher age is associated with increased use of seclusion.

WHAT ARE THE IMPLICATIONS FOR PRACTICE

Nursing managers should be encouraged to guide their staff to reduce the use of seclusion. The negative influences of seclusion and the potential of alternative measures should be highlighted in the education and training of psychiatric nursing managers.

ABSTRACT

Introduction The use of seclusion in psychiatric care should be reduced. The relationship between nursing management or nursing managers' attitudes and the use of seclusion has not been investigated. Aim To describe the associations between the use of seclusion and psychiatric nursing managers' attitudes to containment methods. Method Register data concerning the use of seclusion in Finnish psychiatric care in 2017 were collected. The Attitudes to Containment Measures Questionnaire was used to illustrate psychiatric nursing managers' attitudes to containment methods. An Augmented Naive Bayes analysis was used to investigate the relationships of the use of seclusion and attitudes. Results Nursing managers' age and their attitudes towards containment methods were related to the use of seclusion. Especially nursing managers' negative perceptions of seclusion were associated with less use of seclusion, and seclusion was used more often on wards with nursing managers who were older than the average. Conclusion Nursing managers' negative attitudes towards seclusion have a potential impact on the use of seclusion, which might even result in a reduction in its use in psychiatric inpatient setting. Implications for practice The results suggest that nursing managers should be encouraged to guide their staff to decrease the use of seclusion.

Coercion in psychiatry: A cross-sectional study on staff views and emotions

WHAT IS KNOWN ON THE SUBJECT?: Coercive interventions (CI) in emergency psychiatry face increasing criticism, as they can be an emotional, even traumatic event for all persons involved. They are thus considered the last resort. The use of coercive interventions differs widely with regard to type and frequency of measures across different countries and institutions. Individual staff characteristics, such as attitudes towards coercion, may play a vital role in the management of aggression. Little is known about the influence of emotions of staff members on CI, but they are likely to play an important role. WHAT THE PAPER ADDS TO EXISTING KNOWLEDGE?: Most staff members surveyed had a rather critical view of coercion and considered it a "necessary evil." Staff members with the most work experience had a more critical view of coercion in comparison with less experienced staff. Nurses rated coercion more positively than did psychiatrists or psychologists. Emotions play an important role in decision-making processes. The current study systematically asked for accompanying emotions during the application of CI and looked for individual differences. A majority of the participants experienced compassion; about half felt helplessness, grief or anxiety. Almost 20% stated that they felt a sense of power. Older staff members more often felt anger or guilt; women felt less power than men did. Nurses felt more desperation than other occupational groups. Staff members consider reflective interventions, such as team supervisions or post-seclusion/restraint debriefings with the patient, as important. Nevertheless, only half reported that these interventions are carried out routinely. Staff members believe that certain risk factors (including stress, low staffing, a fully occupied ward and the presence of particular staff members) enhance the probability of CI. WHAT ARE THE IMPLICATIONS FOR PRACTICE?: To reduce the use of coercive interventions, we recommend that psychiatric teams include highly experienced staff members as work experience has a positive effect on the attitudes towards coercive interventions. Structured post-seclusion/restraint debriefings and team supervisions are considered helpful by staff members and are relatively easy to implement on acute wards. Enhancing staff members' ability to reflect on their own attitudes, emotions and actions is likely to reduce coercive interventions. ABSTRACT: Introduction Little is known about staff attitudes towards coercive interventions (CI) and emotions accompanying these measures. Aim The current study assessed attitudes, views on reflective interventions and accompanying emotions of different occupational groups towards CI, as well as factors, that increase the probability of CI. Method Staff members (N = 138) of a large psychiatric hospital in Germany were assessed using the Staff Attitude to Coercion Scale (SACS) and newly developed items assessing staff members' emotions and views on coercion. Results Experienced staff members were most critical of coercion. Nurses rated coercion significantly more positively than other staff. A majority experienced compassion; about half felt helplessness, grief or anxiety. Almost 20% felt a sense of power. Nurses felt the most desperation. Participants strongly desired reflective measures such as post-seclusion/restraint debriefings with patients. According to staff members, stress on the wards and low staffing increases the probability of CI. Discussion The study assessed accompanying emotions during the application of CI. Attitudes towards coercion and emotions are associated with individual staff characteristics (e.g. profession, work experience). Implications The presence of experienced staff members may help prevent CI. Staff consider reflective interventions helpful in reducing CI.

Prevalence and risk factors for seclusion and restraint in old-age psychiatry inpatient units

BACKGROUND AND OBJECTIVES

Coercion in psychiatry is legally tolerated as a last resort. The reduction of the use of coercion is a shared goal of hospital administrators, medical and nursing staff and representatives of patients and families but requires the identification of risk factors for coercion. These risk factors in geriatric psychiatric inpatient settings are not well known, especially regarding seclusion. Through examining the prevalence of coercion and patients' characteristics, this study aims to identify risk factors for coercion in elderly people.

METHODS

The use of coercion in the geriatric psychiatry division of Geneva University Hospital in 2017 was retrospectively analyzed. The incidence rate ratios were estimated with multivariable Poisson regressions to assess risk factors for coercion.

RESULTS

Eighty-one of 494 patients (16.4%) experienced at least one coercive measure during their stay (mainly seclusion). The risk factors for coercion were younger age, male gender, being divorced or married, cognitive disorders, high item 1 of the Health of the Nation Outcome Scales (HoNOS) score (overactive, aggressive, disruptive or agitated behavior) at admission, previous psychiatric hospitalizations and involuntary referrals from the emergency department. Other disorders and global HoNOS scores were not associated with the use of coercion.

CONCLUSION

Higher risks of coercion were outlined in men with cognitive disorders, agitated behaviors, and previous psychiatric hospitalizations. They differed from those observed in younger adults in terms of age, civil status, disorders, global HoNOS scores and referrals. Therefore, geriatric psychiatric populations should be specifically investigated for the development of interventions aiming coercion reduction.

Nurse and patient factors: Predicting seclusion in adolescent psychiatric units

PROBLEM

Seclusion is considered a necessity when alternatives have failed. There is a consensus that seclusion has no therapeutic benefit, which justifies efforts to reduce the practice. This study aimed to identify nurse and patient variables that are predictive of seclusion on a large adolescent inpatient unit.

METHODS

Nested case controls were used to compare 72 afternoon shifts on which seclusion occurred to 216 afternoon shifts on which no seclusion occurred, between 2010 and 2013, at an Adolescent Psychiatric Inpatient Unit.

FINDINGS

Increased seclusion was predicted by a lower nurse to patient ratio, more male nurses on shift, fewer female nurses on shift, the presence of agency/temporary nurses on shift, greater combined years of mental health experience, and lower total HoNOSCA behavior subscale score. Unique predictors that increased risk of seclusion included greater number of male nurses and the presence of agency/temporary nurses, while a greater number of female nurses decreased risk of seclusion.

CONCLUSIONS

Nurses play a unique role in seclusion outcomes that are separate to patient-factors and act as both protective and risk factors for seclusion. Changes can be made to staffing to reduce seclusion and future research should investigate why these nurse-factors contribute to seclusion.

The Role of Implicit and Explicit Staff Attitudes in the Use of Coercive Measures in Psychiatry

Many determinants leading to the use of different coercive measures in psychiatry have been widely studied and it seems that staff attitudes play a crucial role when it comes to the decision-making process about using coercion. However, research results about staff attitudes and their role in the use of coercive measures are inconsistent. This might be due to a focus on self-report studies asking for explicit answers, which involves the risk of bias. This study aimed to expand research on this topic by examining the impact of explicit and implicit staff attitudes on the use of coercive measures in clinical practice. In addition, the influence of gender, profession (nurses, psychiatrists), and years of professional experience as well as their influence on staff attitudes were examined. An adaption of the implicit association measure, the Go/No-Go Association Task (GNAT), with the target category coercion and distracter stimuli describing work load, as well as the explicit questionnaire Staff Attitudes to Coercion Scale (SACS) was completed by staff (N = 149) on 13 acute psychiatric units in 6 hospitals. Data on coercive measures as well as the total number of treated cases for each unit was collected. Results showed that there was no association between staff's implicit and explicit attitudes toward coercion, and neither measure was correlated with the local frequency of coercive measures. ANOVAs showed a significant difference of the GNAT result for the factor gender (F = 9.32, p = 0.003), demonstrating a higher tendency to justify coercion among female staff members (M = -0.23, SD = ±0.35) compared to their male colleagues (M = -0.41, SD = ±0.31). For the SACS, a significant difference was found for the factor profession (F = 7.58, p = 0.007), with nurses (M = 2.79, SD = ±1.40) showing a more positive attitude to the use of coercion than psychiatrists (M = 2.15, SD = ±1.11). No significant associations were found regarding the extent of professional experience. Results indicate a complex interaction between implicit and explicit decision-making processes dependent on specific contexts. We propose future research to include primers for more context-related outcomes. Furthermore, differences in gender suggest a need to direct attention toward occupational safety and possible feelings of anxiety in the workplace, especially for female staff members.

Influence of nursing staff attitudes and characteristics on the use of coercive measures in acute mental health services-A systematic review

WHAT IS KNOWN ON THE SUBJECT?: Aggressive behaviour is a major problem in clinical practice of mental health care and can result in the use of coercive measures. Coercive measures are dangerous for psychiatric patients and international mental healthcare works on the elimination of these interventions. There is no previous review that summarizes the attitude of nursing staff towards coercive measures and the influence of nursing staff characteristics on attitude towards and the use of coercive measures. WHAT THE PAPER ADDS TO EXISTING KNOWLEDGE?: The attitude of nurses shifted from a therapeutic paradigm (coercive measures have positive effects on patients) to a safety paradigm (coercive measures are undesirable, but necessary for the wards' safety). Nurses express the need for less coercive interventions to prevent seclusion and restraint, but their perception of intrusiveness is influenced by how often they use specific coercive measures. The knowledge from scientific literature on the influence of nursing staff on coercive measures is highly inconclusive, although the feeling of safety of nurses might prove to be promising for further research. WHAT ARE THE IMPLICATIONS FOR PRACTICE?: There is need for increased attention specifically for the feeling of safety of nurses, to better equip nurses for their difficult work on acute mental health wards. ABSTRACT: Introduction The use of coercive measures generally has negative effects on patients. To help prevent its use, professionals need insight into what nurses believe about coercion and which staff determinants may influence its application. There is need for an integrated review on both attitude and influence of nurses on the use of coercion. Aim To summarize literature concerning attitude of nurses towards coercive measures and the influence of staff characteristics on the use of coercive measures. Method Systematic review. Results The attitude of nurses changed during the last two decades from a therapeutic to a safety paradigm. Nurses currently view coercive measures as undesirable, but necessary to deal with aggression. Nurses express the need for less intrusive interventions, although familiarity probably influences its perceived intrusiveness. Literature on the relation between staff characteristics and coercive measures is inconclusive. Discussion Nurses perceive coercive measures as unwanted but still necessary to maintain safety on psychiatric wards. Focussing on the determinants of perception of safety might be a promising direction for future research. Implications for practice Mental health care could improve the focus on the constructs of perceived safety and familiarity with alternative interventions to protect patients from unnecessary use of coercive interventions.

Seclusion: A Patient Perspective

The appropriate treatment of mentally unwell, aggressive patients has challenged psychiatry for centuries. Seclusion is practiced worldwide, but concerns remain regarding its appropriateness and lack of alternatives. Patients generally report seclusion as a negative experience, though there is a paucity of literature exploring this in detail. This investigation was a service evaluation appraising inpatients' perspective of processes occurring before (information, communication), during (review, care), and after (debrief, reflection) seclusion in a psychiatric intensive care unit (PICU). In this phenomenological study, qualitative data were gathered using a questionnaire in a structured interview. All patients had been nursed in seclusion during admission to a male PICU at South London and the Maudsley NHS Foundation Trust. Ten patients were interviewed over 4 months. The central theme was perceived lack of communication in the patient-professional relationship, which manifested itself as (i) violence against patients, (ii) lack of psychological support, and (iii) the need for alternatives. Such feedback from patients queries whether national guidelines are appropriate and/or being adhered to. Healthcare practitioners have a responsibility to challenge accepted practice to continually improve the standard of patient-centred care. Utilising patient perspectives can be a powerful driver of change towards more humane treatment of vulnerable patients.

[Duration of seclusion and exit of the seclusion room, study of the impact of anamnestic and institutional factors]

INTRODUCTION

In France, the use of seclusion in psychiatric hospitals is regulated by the Act of January 26th 2016 which enforces a reduction of the use of coercive measures and limiting their duration. Criteria that are unrelated to the patient's symptoms might affect this decision and extend the duration of seclusion. The goal of the current observational study is, firstly, to determine which factors - unrelated to the patient's symptoms - influence the length of stay in seclusion. Secondly, it is to compare the composition of the medical and nursing teams at two times, the beginning and the end of the seclusion time period.

METHOD

We conducted this study in a La Rochelle regional hospital from October 2017 to July 2018. There were one hundred and twenty-four episodes of seclusion that occurred in the different psychiatric inpatient wards during this time. The episodes were divided into two groups: short-term and long-term seclusion, defined by the median duration of seclusion. Data were collected using a survey, completed by the nursing teams, based on the recommendations of good clinical practice published in 1998 and revised in 2017 by the French health authority. For each episode of seclusion, we collected the following data: socio-demographic information, history of psychiatric care of the patient and of violent acting-out, admission status, medical indication for seclusion, day of the week and time at the beginning and the end of seclusion, prior administration of a sedative before seclusion, exceptional events that might justify the end of seclusion, transfer to a protected room after seclusion, as well as the composition of the medical and nursing team on duty at the beginning and the end of the seclusion period. We compared the anamnesis between the short-term and the long-term seclusion groups, and we analyzed the composition of the medical and nursing teams at the two time points of seclusion. Statistical analyses were performed using R software (v. 3.5.1).

RESULTS

The mean duration of seclusion was 4.7 days and the median was 1.9 days. The average age was 37-years-old, with a ratio of 0.6 for females to males. Variables associated with a long-duration of seclusion were: the male gender (P=0.005), Compulsory Admission at the Request of a State Representative (P=0.008), a prevention measure of any hetero-aggressive action (P=0.007), the lack of psychiatric care (P=0.004), previous medico-legal issues (P=0.006), violent behavior during a previous hospitalization (P=0.022) and the use of seclusion on the weekend (P=0.01). The composition of the medical and nursing teams related to the period of the end of seclusion were: the presence of the physician in charge of the patient (P<0.001), a male caregiver in the team (P<0.001), a specialized psychiatric nurse (P<0.001) and the training of caregivers in the management of violence (P<0.001). The presence of nurses who do not usually work in the psychiatric ward was associated with the period of the beginning of seclusion (P<0.001).

CONCLUSION

Our findings showed a strong relationship between several anamnestic factors and the duration of seclusion. Caregivers lacking information about patients, potential violent behaviors and the beginnings of seclusion on weekends are associated with a long-duration of seclusion. Our study also highlights the roles played by the caregivers according to their composition and level of training to determine the ending of patient's seclusion.

A German Version of the Staff Attitude to Coercion Scale. Development and Empirical Validation

Background: Individual staff factors, such as personality traits and attitudes, are increasingly seen as an important factor in the reduction of coercion in mental health services. At the same time, only a few validated instruments exist to measure those factors and examine their influence on the use of coercion. Aim: The present study aimed to develop and validate a German version of the Staff Attitude to Coercion Scale (SACS). Methods: The original English version of the SACS published was translated into German. Subsequently, it was empirically validated on a sample of N = 209 mental health professionals by conducting an exploratory factor analysis. Results: The three-factor structure in the original version of the SACS, consisting of critical, pragmatic and positive attitudes toward the use of coercion, could not be replicated. Instead, the German version revealed one factor ranging from rejecting to approving the use of coercion. Conclusion: The SACS is one of the first instruments created to assess staff attitudes toward coercion in a validated way. The version of the instrument developed in this study allows for a validated assessment of those attitudes in German. Our results highlight the ethical importance of using validated measurements in studies on the role of staff factors in the reduction of coercion.

Factors influencing decisions of mental health professionals to release service users from seclusion: A qualitative study

AIM

This study aims to explore and understand factors influencing the decisions of mental health professionals releasing service users from seclusion.

BACKGROUND

Seclusion should only be used as a last resort and for the minimum possible duration. Current evidence outlines which service users are more likely to be secluded, why and what influences professionals' decision to seclude. Little is known about factors professionals consider when releasing service users.

DESIGN

A qualitative study was undertaken to explore factors which influence decision-making of mental health professionals when terminating episodes of seclusion.

METHODS

Semi-structured face-to-face interviews with 21 professionals were undertaken between May 2017-January 2018. Framework analysis was used to systematically manage, analyse, and identify themes, while maintaining links to primary data and providing a transparent audit trail.

RESULTS

Six themes were identified where professionals looked for service users to demonstrate cooperation and compliance before they would be released. Decisions were subjective, being influenced by the experience and composition of the review team, the availability of resources plus the emotional tone and physical environment of the ward. Release could be delayed by policy and protocol.

CONCLUSION

Professionals should have greater awareness of factors that hinder or facilitate decisions to release service from seclusion and an understanding of how service user views and involves in decisions regarding seclusion should be explored.

IMPACT

Senior staff should be available to facilitate release at the earliest opportunity. Staff should ensure that policy and procedures do not prolong the time service users remain secluded.

Cross-sectional study on nurses' attitudes regarding coercive measures: the importance of socio-demographic characteristics, job satisfaction, and strategies for coping with stress

BACKGROUND

Coercive measures are containment methods used in psychiatry to curb patients' disruptive and aggressive behaviours towards themselves, others or objects. The prevalence of the practice of coercive measures in psychiatry is directly related to the attitudes of the staff. When discussing these attitudes, nurses are often particularly singled out. The purpose of the study is to research the impact of individual factors on nurses' attitudes in the decision-making process for the use of coercive measures.

METHODS

A cross-sectional study among all psychiatric nursing staff in Slovenia (n = 367, 79%) was conducted over the years 2013/2014. Standardized questionnaires were used, including a survey of nurses' attitudes to the use of seclusion, the Job Descriptive Index, and the Folkman-Lazarus test.

RESULTS

Nurses' attitudes towards special coercive measures are predominantly negative ([Formula: see text] = 11.312, SD = 2.641). The factors that explain a positive attitude are as follows: female gender (β = - 0.236, p <  0.001), fewer years of service (β = - 0.149, p = 0.023), emotion-focused strategies of coping with stress (β = 0.139, p = 0.020), and less-threatening patient behaviour (β = 0.157, p = 0.012).

CONCLUSIONS

The effects of some known factors did not prove important in the model. Newly recognized factors are "less-threatening patient behaviour" and "emotion-focused strategies of coping with stress". Therefore, attitudes towards special coercive measures in psychiatry must be regarded as contextualized, interactive, and multidimensional phenomena that cannot be explained merely through a defined set of factors.